Effective Drug Control: Toward A New Legal Framework

The Cannabis Revenue and Education Act was introduced in 1981 in
Massachusetts to regulate the commercial production and distribution of cannabis. 489 The
Act would impose a tax based on THC content, with half of the net tax proceeds going
toward a Cannabis Education Trust, set up to educate the public about marijuana abuse.
The Cannabis Revenue Act (CRA), drafted in the U.S. Congress in 1982, was the
only bill at the federal level to regulate and tax cannabis. The bill would have allowed
each state to choose one of three options for legalizing cannabis: 1) retaining prohibition;
2) be part of the federal regulation and taxation scheme with only laws to handle driving
under the influence and distribution to minors; or 3) enact its own regulation and taxation
scheme in addition to the federal one. 490
Bills modeled on the federal CRA proposal were introduced in Oregon and
Pennsylvania in 1983. The Oregon bill called for state-operated stores with the revenue
earmarked for local school districts and law enforcement. 491 The Pennsylvania bill would
have put the regulation of the commercial cannabis industry under the Department of
Agriculture with retail sales at state-owned liquor outlets, and personal cultivation and
possession would allowed up to 2.2 pounds. 492
A bill was introduced in the Missouri legislature in 1990 to license the production,
distribution and sale of all drugs with strict limits on where drugs could be used,
prohibiting drug use in bars, restaurants, offices, or cars, and in the presence of a minor
under age 18, including in a private residence. 493
An organization called Washington Citizens for Drug Policy Reform sponsored
an initiative in 1993 to regulate cannabis in the state of Washington. Under Initiative
595, adults would have been allowed to grow and possess up to a “personal use quantity,”
as determined by the courts, while cultivating, transporting and selling more than a
personal use quantity would have required a license obtained from a cannabis control
authority. There would be a $15 tax per ounce of cannabis “at standard cured moisture
content.” 494 The initiative allowed the retail sale of “cannabis products” made from the
cannabis plant, opening the possibility of a wide variety of cannabis-based products like
sodas, candy and teas. The initiative also made sure to mention federal intervention:
Sec. 21. State agencies shall refrain from enforcing any provision of United
States criminal law not consistent with the purposes of this act, to avoid a waste of
resources. 495
Two drug regulation initiatives were put forward in Oregon in 1997. The Oregon
Drug Control Amendment would have amended the state constitution to require that laws
regulating controlled substances be passed and to prohibit laws prohibiting adult
possession of controlled substances. 496 The amendment included a section that prohibited
the state from making a “net profit from the manufacture or sale of controlled
substances.” 497 The Oregon legislature was to enact a regulatory scheme to address the
following issues:
a. A minimum legal age of not greater than 21 years;
b. Reasonable limits on adult personal possession;